0
Starstuff Posted 19 years ago
Grammar
Comma and nonessential elements
0 I have a question on how commas are used in the bold part below: 02 br
02 br
00 "But, while the technology has moved on, 01 b 00 the patent system that is supposed to protect it, is badly in need of reform. 02 b 00 " 02 br
00 Source: 02 br
05 0 02 br
02 br
00 However, as a single sentence, is #1 the right way to punctuate? 02 br
02 br
00 1. The patent system 01 b 00 , 02 b 00 which is supposed to protect it 01 b 00 , 02 b 00 is badly in need of reform. 02 br
02 br
00 2. The patent system that is supposed to protect it 01 b 00 , 02 b 00 is badly in need of reform. 02 br
02 br
00 I've leanred I have to use two commas, not one, to separate a nonessential element from a sentence. Is the author also correct in this case? 02 br
02 br
00 Thanks for any help. 05 1 0240href http://www.economist.com/daily/news/displaystory.cfm?story_id=875891411id 1
02 br
00 "But, while the technology has moved on, 01 b 00 the patent system that is supposed to protect it, is badly in need of reform. 02 b 00 " 02 br
00 Source: 02 br
05 0 02 br
02 br
00 However, as a single sentence, is #1 the right way to punctuate? 02 br
02 br
00 1. The patent system 01 b 00 , 02 b 00 which is supposed to protect it 01 b 00 , 02 b 00 is badly in need of reform. 02 br
02 br
00 2. The patent system that is supposed to protect it 01 b 00 , 02 b 00 is badly in need of reform. 02 br
02 br
00 I've leanred I have to use two commas, not one, to separate a nonessential element from a sentence. Is the author also correct in this case? 02 br
02 br
00 Thanks for any help. 05 1 0240href http://www.economist.com/daily/news/displaystory.cfm?story_id=875891411id 1
Top answer
0 I shudder to try to contradict so widely respected a publication as the Economist, but the sentence as you have originally quoted does seem wrong. ") 0-
- 0 I shudder to try to contradict so widely respected a publication as the Economist, but the sentence as you have originally quoted does seem wrong.
- ") 0-
Get the Weekly English Kit 📬
New words, one handy idiom, and a 2-minute quiz — delivered to your inbox to keep your streak alive.
3 Answers
0
0 I shudder to try to contradict so widely respected a publication as the Economist, but the sentence as you have originally quoted does seem wrong. I would remove the comma between "it" and "is." 02 br
02 br
00 Your #1 is okay as well - it depends on whether you see the "supposed to protect it" as additional information (set it off with commas and use "which") or required (no com
02 br
00 Your #1 is okay as well - it depends on whether you see the "supposed to protect it" as additional information (set it off with commas and use "which") or required (no com
00
0 Hi, 02 br
02 br
01 font 00 have a question on how commas are used in the bold part below: 02 br
02 br
00 "But, while the technology has moved on, 01 b 00 the patent system that is supposed to protect it, is badly in need of reform. 02 b 00 " 02 br
00 Source: 02 br
05 0 02 br
02 br
00 Howeve
02 br
01 font 00 have a question on how commas are used in the bold part below: 02 br
02 br
00 "But, while the technology has moved on, 01 b 00 the patent system that is supposed to protect it, is badly in need of reform. 02 b 00 " 02 br
00 Source: 02 br
05 0 02 br
02 br
00 Howeve
00
Related Questions